not a movie review: capote.

I sometimes think that I should post movie reviews up here. I like movies and people nag me when I don't post, so it seemed like a natural combination. But I don't really like the idea of calling them movie reviews. To me, that term implies, well, for one thing, that the writer knows anything at all about movies. And I don't really. So for me to write a movie post, it would really be more like "I don't know movies, but I know what I like." Except that since I'm making you read it, it's more like "I don't know movies, but now you know what I like."

So think of this as a Not a Movie Review. I'm not going to feel obligated to talk about cinematography or the script or the directing unless those things strike me, in which case I will. It's my blog anyway.

Capote

To sum up: Truman Capote is a flamboyant and just outright odd writer who hears about some murders in Kansas and goes to write a story about it. He becomes close with the residents of the town and then with those arrested for the killings. The movie covers his relationship with one of the killers in particular, Perry Smith, and how Capote transforms this experience into a genre of writing he claims to have invented, the nonfiction novel. Based on the story of Capote writing In Cold Blood, his most famous work. Also feature Capote's childhood pal, Harper Lee, in the midst of the publishing of To Kill a Mockingbird.

I really wanted to see this film. For one thing, I like Philip Seymour Hoffman (who played the title character) in the way that I like a lot of actors who are not particularly attractive. Oh, he's in no way ugly. He's just not pretty enough to be a famous actor without being talented. I've only seen him in smaller roles thus far, but his performances leave me with a nice fuzzy feeling that he was exactly what he should have been (see Brandt, The Big Lebowski and Lester Bangs, Almost Famous). Further reasons to see this film were that that it has a basis in fact (it's like learning!) and is centered around an incredibly interesting and eccentric person. Plus, it's mostly set in Kansas. What's not to like?

And you know what? It was a really good movie. The kind of good movie that I have no interest in seeing again anytime soon. I guess I mean that while I understand its beauty and quality, it isn't necessarily entertaining. It is slooooow. There are a ton of panoramic shots of flat and empty prairies interlaced with scenes of quiet dialog in old houses. And that's totally the point, because that's rural Kansas. I understand and appreciate that idea, but I don't necessarily want to watch it again.

The pace of the film is countered with a fair amount of suspense. A great deal of the movie is Capote trying to get Smith to talk to him about the night of the murders. And each time Capote goes back to the jail cell to ask what happened, you want to shake the guy, "Tell him! Tell him!" So it's quiet, Kansan suspense, but it is suspense nonetheless. In some ways, that makes it even more maddening.

What the movie does really well is the character study, both of its eponymous character and his jailbound confidant. The latter is so quiet and unassuming. You want to like him for his gentle manner, and just when you catch yourself rooting for him to get off death row, you think, wait, this dude shot four people in the face. He should hang.

And then there is Mr. Capote himself. You can't help loving him, because he's charming and interesting and has had this horrifying (no, seriously) childhood. But you want to hate him, too, because he's this arrogant, lying attention-whore who will make a joke about how much more important he is than you are. The whole time you are never really sure what his relationship with Smith is, which is likely a mystery that carried over from reality. Did Truman care anything about him, or was he just getting his novel? You get evidence of each, but when Truman is being tender, you're never sure that you can trust him. Hoffman gives us a Truman Capote who is fascinating and possibly brilliant, but not necessarily someone you'd like if you met him.

I do like that the movie leaves in a lot of ambiguity about Capote's motives. I would feel that it was untrue if the director glorified him, but I don't want him to be demonized either. I'm okay with him just being complicated. The most beautiful line in the movie was Capote's answer when Harper Lee asked him whether he was just using Smith for the novel. "It's as if Perry and I grew up in the same house. And one day he stood up and went out the back door, while I went out the front." And while that's awfully pretty to be true, you do want to believe him. Maybe he even believed it himself.

As a side note, Catherine Keener was lovely as Harper Lee. I have no idea what kind of person Ms. Lee really was, but I would want to think that she was a beautiful, intelligent and gentle person. Even if she was in fact an obnoxious she-demon, this portrayal was exactly how I want to picture her. Her affinity for Capote made it easier for the audience to appreciate him as a individual who is flawed but has quality as well. We should all have a Harper Lee in our lives who loves us for who we are but doesn't let us get away with being jerks.

Basically, see the movie if you want. It's interesting and the acting is fantastic. It's so good that you end up judging the movie more on how you feel about the characters than the actors. There's some intense, but brief and disguised violence and several naughty words.

So there was my attempt at Not a Movie Review. I'm not sure I liked it, and I'm really not sure if you did. It may not ever happen again.